Maternal and Child Health Journal

, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp 96–107 | Cite as

A Process Evaluation of the WV Smoking Cessation and Reduction in Pregnancy Treatment (SCRIPT) Dissemination Initiative: Assessing the Fidelity and Impact of Delivery for State-Wide, Home-Based Healthy Start Services

  • Richard Windsor
  • Jeannie Clark
  • Amanda Davis
  • John Wedeles
  • Lorien Abroms


Objectives Process evaluation data are essential to document the fidelity of program implementation by clinical staff and confirm patient behavior change. This report presents a process evaluation model applied to the Smoking Cessation and Reduction in Pregnancy Treatment Dissemination Initiative for the statewide, home-based West Virginia Right From The Start Project. Methods Trained RFTS Designated Care Coordinators, nurses and social workers, of 50+ primary care agencies in all 55 counties, delivered SCRIPT to Medicaid patients who smoked. Results The process evaluation defined the level of DCC delivery of seven core SCRIPT procedures to produce a Program Implementation Index: a summary performance metric. A SCRIPT PII > 0.80 was established as the RFTS adoption standard. The PII increased from 0.53 in 2004 to 0.65 in 2006–2007 to 0.77 in 2009–2010. Although the PII > 0.80 was not achieved, exposure rates were increased for all seven SCRIPT procedures. Agency and DCC turnover, a transient patient population, and recession of 2008–2010 were barriers to achieving the adoption metric and implementation of an experimental design. A quasi-experimental Stratified, Matched Comparison (C) Group Design was selected to evaluate behavioral impact differences between a RFTS-Comparison (C) Group from 2006 to 2007 and the RFTS-SCRIPT E Group from 2009 to 2010. Impact analyses of the DCC delivery of the SCRIPT Program with higher fidelity documented a statistically significant increase in the cessation rate from 4.6 % and significant reduction rate from 6.9 % for the (C) Group in 2006–2007 to 13.9 % and 11.22 % respectively for the E Group in 2009–2010. Conclusion The PEM can assist statewide, home-based prenatal care programs to improve the quality of delivery and evaluate counseling programs.


Process evaluation Smoking cessation program Dissemination Healthy start Home-based Care Prenatal care services 



The Institutional Review Boards of the George Washington University and the West Virginia Bureau of Public Health approved this project. The leadership of the SCRIPT Dissemination Initiative recognizes the contributions of the following colleagues who assisted in planning and implementation: Sean Cleary, Kalpana Ramiah, Anne Williams, Pat Moss, and Jackie Newson (BPH). We would also like to recognize members of the Dissemination Committee for their contributions to the success of this project: Brenda Johnson, Dee Meadows, Beverly Kitchen, Sandra Ellard, Mary Christian, Joan Dayoub, Charlita Atha, Patsy Parker, Lori Meadows, Suellen Friend, Paula Darby, Bobbie Paris, Lenaa Ryan and Janeen Masker. A special thanks to Regina Grollman Windsor and Dr. Myra Crawford.


This work was supported by The National Cancer Institute RO1 CA 124429-01-A1 (2007-12).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

There are no competing interests for any Author.


  1. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. (2010). Committee opinion no. 471: Smoking cessation during pregnancy. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 116(5), 1241–1244. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182004fcd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benowitz, N. L., et al. (2002). Subcommittee on Biochemical Verification, Biochemical verification of tobacco use and cessation. Nicotine Tobacco Research, 4(2), 149–159. doi: 10.1080/14622200210123581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cook, T., & Campbell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  4. Cooke, M., Mattick, R., & Walsh, R. (2001). Differential uptake of a smoking cessation programme disseminated to doctors and midwives in antenatal clinics. Addiction, 96(3), 495–505. doi: 10.1080/0965214002005455.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dolan-Mullen, P., Ramirez, G., & Groff, J. Y. (1994). A meta-analysis of randomized trials of prenatal smoking cessation interventions. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 171(5), 1328–1334. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(94)90156-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Fiore, M., Bailey, W., & Cohen, S. et al. (2000). Treating tobacco use and dependence: A clinical practice guideline. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ publication No. 00-0032.Google Scholar
  7. Fiore, M., Jaen, C., Baker, T., et al. (2008). Treating tobacco use and dependence: 2008 Update. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, AHRQ.Google Scholar
  8. Goldenberg, R., Klerman, L., Windsor, R., & Whiteside Jr. H. (2000). Smoking in pregnancy: Final thoughts. Tobacco Control, 9(Suppl III), 85–86.Google Scholar
  9. Gomez, C., Berlin, I., Marquis, P., & Delcroix, M. (2005). Expired air carbon monoxide concentration in mothers and their spouses above 5 PPM is associated with decreased fetal growth. Preventive Medicine, 40, 10–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Institute of Medicine (IOM). (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  11. Kharrazi, M., Delorenze, G., Kaufman, F., et al. (2006). Environmental tobacco smoke and pregnancy outcomes, Epidemiology, 15, 6, November, pp. 660–670.Google Scholar
  12. Li, C., Windsor, R., Lowe, J., & Goldenberg, R. (1992). Evaluation of the impact of dissemination of smoking cessation methods on the low birthweight rate and on health care costs: Achieving year 2000 objectives for the nation. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 8(3), 171–177.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Lowe, J., Balanda, P., Stanton, W., Del Mar, C., & O’Connor, V. (2002). Dissemination of an efficacious antenatal smoking cessation program in public hospitals in Australia: A randomized controlled trial. Health Education & Behavior, 29(5), 608–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lumley, J., Chamberlain, C., Dowswell, T., Oliver, S., Oakley, L., & Watson, L. (2009). Interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Systematic Review,. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001055.Google Scholar
  15. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovation, 5th Ed. New York, NY.Google Scholar
  16. Tong, V., Jones, J., Dietz, P., D’Angelo, D., & Bombard, J. (2009). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Trends in smoking before, during, and after pregnancy–pregnancy risk assessment monitoring system (PRAMS), united states, 31 sites, 2000–2005. MMWR Surveillance Summary, 58(4), 1–29.Google Scholar
  17. Ware, J., & Hamel, M. (2011). Pragmatic trials–guides to better patient care? The New England Journal of Medicine, 364(18), 1685–1687. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1103502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Wedeles, J. (2014). DrPH Dissertation, Predictors of program participation and behavior change among pregnant women in the West Virginia-Smoking Cessation and Reduction In Pregnancy Treatment (SCRIPT) Dissemination Initiative, George Washington University, School Public Health and Health Services, Committee Chair: Dr. Richard Windsor.Google Scholar
  19. West Virginia Birth Score Office. (2008). Medicaid mothers who smoke during pregnancy, WV residents, CY 2006. Charleston, WV: West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, Office of Maternal, Child and Family Health.Google Scholar
  20. Windsor R. (2005). Commit to quit smoking during and after pregnancy, 2nd ed. [DVD]. Washington, DC: Society for Public Health Education.Google Scholar
  21. Windsor R. (2005). A pregnant woman’s guide to quit smoking, 5th edn. Washington, DC: Society for Public Health Education.Google Scholar
  22. Windsor, R. (2008). SCRIPT counseling guidelines. Washington, DC: George Washington University.Google Scholar
  23. Windsor, R. (2011). Behavioral treatment methods for pregnant smokers: The evidence-base for prenatal care programs and professional practice. In A. Handler, J. Kennelly, & N. Peacock (Eds.), Reducing racial/ethnic disparities in reproductive and perinatal outcomes: The evidence from population-based interventions (pp. 239–263). NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Windsor, R. (2015). Evaluation of health promotion and disease prevention programs: Improving population health through evidence-based practices (5th ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Windsor, R., Boyd, N., & Orleans, C. (1998). Meta-evaluation of smoking cessation intervention research among pregnant women: Improving the science and art. Health Education Research, 13(3), 419–438.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Windsor, R., Clark, J., Cleary, S., et al. (2014). Effectiveness of the smoking cessation and reduction in pregnancy treatment (SCRIPT) dissemination project: A science to prenatal care practice partnership. Maternal and Child Health J., 18(1), 180–190. doi: 10.1007/s10995-013-1252-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Windsor, R., Cleary, S., Ramiah, K., Clark, J., Abroms, L., & Davis, A. (2013). The smoking cessation and reduction in pregnancy treatment (SCRIPT) adoption scale: Evaluating the diffusion of a tobacco treatment innovation to a statewide prenatal care program and providers. Journal of Health Communication, 18(10), 1201–1220. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2013.778358.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Windsor, R., Cutter, G., Morris, J., et al. (1985). The effectiveness of smoking cessation methods for smokers in public health maternity clinics: A randomized trial. American Journal of Public Health, 75(12), 1389–1392.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Windsor, R., Li, C., Boyd, N., & Hartmann, K. (1999). The use of significant reduction rates to evaluate health education methods for pregnant smokers: A new harm reduction behavioral indicator? Health Education & Behavior, 26(5), 648–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Windsor, R., Lowe, J., Perkins, L., et al. (1993). Health education for pregnant smokers: Its behavioral impact and cost benefit. American Journal of Public Health, 83(2), 201–206.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Windsor, R., Whiteside, H, Jr., Solomon, L., et al. (2000a). A process evaluation model for patient education programs for pregnant smokers. Tobacco Control, 9(Supplement 3), III29–III35.PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Windsor, R., Woodby, L., Miller, T., et al. (2000b). Effectiveness of agency for health care policy and research clinical practice guideline and patient education methods for pregnant smokers in medicaid maternity care. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 182(1 Pt 1), 68–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Woodby, L., Windsor, R., Snyder, S., Kohler, C., & Diclemente, C. (1999). Predictors of smoking cessation during pregnancy. Addiction, 94(2), 283–292.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. WV Department of Health and Human Resources. (2007). Reports on the Blueprint to Improve West Virginia perinatal health: Final report. Charleston, WV: Community Voices, Inc.Google Scholar
  35. The Affordable Care Act. (2014). US Department of Health and Human Services website. Accessed Oct 15, 2014.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Windsor
    • 1
  • Jeannie Clark
    • 2
  • Amanda Davis
    • 3
  • John Wedeles
    • 4
  • Lorien Abroms
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Prevention and Community Health, School of Public Health and Health ServicesGeorge Washington University Medical CenterWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Bureau for Public HealthWest Virginia Department of Health and Human ResourcesCharlestonUSA
  3. 3.Medical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Prevention and Community HealthGWU School of Public Health and Health ServicesWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations